(05-05-2014 07:24 PM)Shameless Wrote: Well I was tasked with saying the Pledge of Allegiance in my school over the intercom. I said the original pledge (the one before it was changed to counter Russians). I said the pledge w/o the words Under God in it. People said I was being offensive. I don't believe so. Do you think I did the right thing?

Can you better describe the situation - does the school do this regularly?
If you were the first to do the Pledge without the reverence to god they were probably trying to draw you out of the closet. They probably want to find out if you have anything to offer, as far as knowledge about reality that they are oblivious to.

How did the conversation go that placed you in the position of defending your recital of the Pledge?

Did you have a well reasoned explanation, or were you defensive, because you really didn't have any experience discussing the matter???

Well the school recites the pledge over the intercom. Well, the school's announcement team. I was a new member of the announcement team so when I did the pledge I decided to simply not say Under God, like the pledge was originally written. I was indeed the first to have done this.

(06-05-2014 11:56 AM)TrainWreck Wrote: Can you better describe the situation - does the school do this regularly?
If you were the first to do the Pledge without the reverence to god they were probably trying to draw you out of the closet. They probably want to find out if you have anything to offer, as far as knowledge about reality that they are oblivious to.

How did the conversation go that placed you in the position of defending your recital of the Pledge?

Did you have a well reasoned explanation, or were you defensive, because you really didn't have any experience discussing the matter???

Well the school recites the pledge over the intercom. Well, the school's announcement team. I was a new member of the announcement team so when I did the pledge I decided to simply not say Under God, like the pledge was originally written. I was indeed the first to have done this.

I'm reasonably sure that a great deal of the Founding Fathers would be rather horrified at the idea of the Pledge of Allegiance in the first place. The government is of the people, by the people, and for the people. It deserve our loyalty only insofar as it does it's job, blind unquestioning loyalty is the road to despotism.

The pledge itself wasn't composed until 1892, well over a hundred years after the foundation of the nation. Even then it wasn't formerly adopted by Congress until 1942. Keep in mind that this was in the midst of the Second World War, and that other changes in the next decade that accompanied this in the war's aftermath and the subsequent communist Red Scare. This lead to adding 'under god' to the pledge in 1954 and changing the national motto to 'One Nation Under God' in 1956.

It's all reactionary nonsense that shits all over the Enlightenment ideals espoused by many of our nation's founding fathers.

(05-05-2014 07:24 PM)Shameless Wrote: Well I was tasked with saying the Pledge of Allegiance in my school over the intercom. I said the original pledge (the one before it was changed to counter Russians). I said the pledge w/o the words Under God in it. People said I was being offensive. I don't believe so. Do you think I did the right thing?

Next time, Tell them you want to make amends for your mistake by doing it over again.

Instead of saying Under god. Say Under Allah with whatever and so on.

Here is a politically correct and up to date version of our pledge of allegiance.
I pledge my allegiance to the Military of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stood. One nation under capitalism, with liberty and justice for the 1%.

(05-05-2014 07:24 PM)Shameless Wrote: I said the pledge w/o the words Under God in it. People said I was being offensive. I don't believe so. Do you think I did the right thing?

In all seriousness, do I think you did the right thing? If you believe that saying "under god" gives support to an idea you think you shouldn't support, or don't want to support, then I would say you did the right thing in terms of being true to yourself when it didn't materially harm anyone else.

But do I think you were wrong? Hell no! If anyone is wrong in this scenario, it is school administrators who coerce kids into publicly declaring a pledge of allegiance and demanding the inclusion of a recognition of god.

(07-05-2014 02:30 AM)djhall Wrote: But do I think you were wrong? Hell no! If anyone is wrong in this scenario, it is school administrators who coerce kids into publicly declaring a pledge of allegiance and demanding the inclusion of a recognition of god.

They cannot compel you to say the 'under god' part, as that would be in violation of your First Amendment rights. Likewise dropping the 'under god' part and reverting to an earlier and less secretarin wording is you expressing your First Amendment rights; including the freedom of speech, thought, and religion (or lack thereof, which has the same legal protection as religion).

(07-05-2014 02:30 AM)djhall Wrote: But do I think you were wrong? Hell no! If anyone is wrong in this scenario, it is school administrators who coerce kids into publicly declaring a pledge of allegiance and demanding the inclusion of a recognition of god.

They cannot compel you to say the 'under god' part, as that would be in violation of your First Amendment rights. Likewise dropping the 'under god' part and reverting to an earlier and less secretarin wording is you expressing your First Amendment rights; including the freedom of speech, thought, and religion (or lack thereof, which has the same legal protection as religion).

(07-05-2014 06:07 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote: They cannot compel you to say the 'under god' part, as that would be in violation of your First Amendment rights. Likewise dropping the 'under god' part and reverting to an earlier and less secretarin wording is you expressing your First Amendment rights; including the freedom of speech, thought, and religion (or lack thereof, which has the same legal protection as religion).

Unfortunately not. America is a theocracy.

No, The United States is an oligarchy and a plutocracy. Do you really think the Koch Brothers buy into the super conservative fundy bullshit that is spewed forth by those they fund? No, but they do realize that it motivates the ignorant Republican base to go out and vote without any idea how much they are inadvertently fucking over their own self interests. Those people then get into power and now owe the Koch a lot of favors, and will do their bidding (and screw the interest of the voters) so that they can maintain their elected position. Money controls politics, not religion; but those with the money will use the religious patsy's for their own ends.

Now this can be fixed, and I've already told you about WOLF-PAC. Now get off your fukcing ass and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT besides bitching like a spoiled brat.